16:00:41 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-star
16:00:45 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-irc
16:00:45 <rubensworks> present+
16:00:47 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-star
16:00:57 <TallTed> present+
16:00:59 <ora> present+
16:01:00 <afs> zakim, this will be RDF star
16:01:00 <Zakim> ok, afs
16:01:06 <ktk> zakim, who's here?
16:01:06 <Zakim> Present: TallTed, ora
16:01:09 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, pfps, ora, rubensworks, TallTed, AZ, gkellogg, Dominik_T, afs, ghurlbot, VladimirAlexiev, Timothe, agendabot, driib, Tpt, ktk, csarven, rhiaro, gtw, pchampin
16:01:12 <ktk> present+
16:01:14 <afs> present+
16:01:17 <Dominik_T> present+
16:01:31 <TallTed> agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/f2add3af-6743-4f52-8fcc-4f62c6cdd8af/20230413T120000#agenda
16:01:31 <agendabot> clear agenda
16:01:31 <agendabot> agenda+ Scribe: Thibodeau, Ted (alternate: Zimmermann, Antoine)
16:01:31 <agendabot> agenda+ Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/06-rdf-star-minutes.html
16:01:31 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of open actions, available at  -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3
16:01:32 <agendabot> agenda+ Review of pull requests, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4
16:01:35 <agendabot> agenda+ Continuation "First Public Working Draft" (FPWD) process
16:01:36 <enrico> enrico has joined #rdf-star
16:01:37 <gkellogg> meeting: RDF-star WG
16:01:42 <agendabot> agenda+ Use case proposal by Peter:  -> 4 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0100.html
16:01:43 <agendabot> agenda+ Update on process concerns/proposal:  -> 5 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-star-wg/2023Mar/0064.html
16:01:45 <TallTed> Zakim, start meeting
16:01:46 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
16:01:47 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), TallTed
16:01:47 <agendabot> agenda+ Any Other Business (AOB), time permitting Next week's scribe: Zimmermann, Antoine
16:01:47 <enrico> present+
16:01:59 <TallTed> meeting: RDF-Star Working Group
16:02:08 <olaf> olaf has joined #rdf-star
16:02:11 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:02:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:02:27 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:02:30 <TallTed> scribe+
16:02:38 <ora> chair+
16:03:12 <TallTed> Zakim, close item 1
16:03:12 <Zakim> agendum 1, Scribe: Thibodeau, Ted (alternate: Zimmermann, Antoine), closed
16:03:14 <Zakim> I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:03:14 <Zakim> 2. Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/06-rdf-star-minutes.html [from agendabot]
16:03:14 <olaf> present+
16:03:17 <pfps> minutes look fine
16:03:25 <TallTed> Zakim, open item 2
16:03:25 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Approval of last week's minutes:  -> 1 https://www.w3.org/2023/04/06-rdf-star-minutes.html -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:03:44 <TallTed> ora: any comments on last week's minutes?
16:03:49 <TallTed> [crickets]
16:04:04 <ora> PROPOSAL: Accept last week's minutes
16:04:09 <AZ> +1
16:04:10 <ora> +1
16:04:12 <Dominik_T> +1
16:04:13 <ktk> +1
16:04:17 <pfps> +1
16:04:21 <gkellogg> +1
16:04:26 <rubensworks> +1
16:04:26 <TallTed> <TallTed> +1
16:04:37 <olaf> +1
16:04:38 <afs> +1
16:04:40 <enrico> +1
16:04:45 <ora> RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
16:04:55 <TallTed> Zakim, next agendum
16:04:55 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Review of open actions, available at  -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:05:21 <doerthe> doerthe has joined #rdf-star
16:05:29 <doerthe> present+
16:05:33 <TallTed> ora: nothing completed; pchampin is on vacation
16:05:40 <TallTed> regrets+ pchampin
16:05:45 <TallTed> Zakim, next agendum
16:05:45 <Zakim> agendum 3 was just opened, TallTed
16:05:53 <TallTed> zakim, close item 3
16:05:53 <Zakim> agendum 3, Review of open actions, available at  -> 2 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/3, closed
16:05:55 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:05:55 <Zakim> 4. Review of pull requests, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 [from agendabot]
16:06:03 <TallTed> Zakim, next agendum
16:06:03 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review of pull requests, available at  -> 3 https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/20/views/4 -- taken up [from agendabot]
16:06:23 <ora> q?
16:06:29 <TallTed> ora: we have a bunch of PRs to discuss. who wants to start?
16:06:55 <pfps> q+
16:06:56 <TallTed> gkellogg: concepts update and terminology...
16:07:39 <TallTed> gkellogg: I was referring to rdf-comcepts#32, but doing others first may make more sense
16:07:39 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-comcepts/issues/32 -> Issue 32 [not found]
16:07:52 <TallTed> ora: 2 editorial changes marked with need discussion...
16:08:00 <pfps> q+ on LI 38
16:08:07 <ora> ack pfps
16:08:07 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to comment on LI 38
16:08:12 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-schema/pull/8
16:08:35 <TallTed> pfps: it's just languishing. someone needs to work on it.
16:08:56 <TallTed> ora: any volunteers to fix it?
16:09:44 <TallTed> pfps: a number of us have proposed changes.
16:10:04 <gkellogg> scribe+
16:10:25 <gkellogg> TallTed: Loooking at rdf-schema#8, I don't see any requested changes that have not been addressed
16:10:26 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-schema/issues/8 -> Pull Request 8 change range of rdf:predicate + small HTML fixes (domel) needs discussion, spec:editorial
16:10:52 <gkellogg> ... Other than requests to change prose. If you have a request, please make a specific request for a change.
16:10:59 <gkellogg> scribe-
16:11:51 <gkellogg> scribe+
16:11:57 <afs> q+
16:12:06 <gkellogg> TallTed: You have a proposed suggestion, but no specific wording suggested.
16:12:21 <gkellogg> pfps: Can anyone suggest editorial changes to documents?
16:12:28 <gkellogg> TallTed: Yes, anyone can.
16:12:34 <gkellogg> scribe-
16:12:39 <ora> ack afs
16:13:07 <TallTed> afs: Commits can also be added to an existing PR.
16:13:09 <gkellogg> q+
16:13:12 <TallTed> q+
16:13:15 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:13:19 <pfps> I'll put together a commit to resolve the issue, and change the issue title
16:13:36 <TallTed> gkellogg: you can make a PR against a PR (or rather, against the branch behind the PR)
16:13:52 <TallTed> ... the suggestion mechanism is quite useful
16:14:08 <TallTed> ... none of these are limited to editorial changes
16:14:26 <ora> ack TallTed
16:14:57 <gkellogg> scribe+
16:15:37 <ora> q+
16:15:43 <ora> ack ora
16:15:46 <gkellogg> TallTed: While a PR is a change request, be careful of loosing the chain of commits to the PR.
16:15:51 <gkellogg> scribe-
16:15:54 <pfps> I am again confused as to what I should do
16:16:14 <TallTed> ors: I'm suggesting that pfps take the lead on these changes
16:16:21 <ora> s/ors/ora
16:16:24 <gkellogg> q+
16:16:30 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:16:33 <TallTed> pfps: I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing, as GitHub actions
16:17:08 <pfps> OK, I'll push a commit on the branch of the PR?
16:17:44 <pfps> Or not?
16:18:18 <Dominik_T_> Dominik_T_ has joined #rdf-star
16:19:46 <ora> q+
16:20:06 <ora> ack ora
16:21:17 <pfps> q+
16:21:23 <ora> ack pfps
16:22:01 <afs> I'm happy with commits on PRs I send in when the PR is otherwise quiet and the changes do not fit in a suggestion. e.g. the changes are in multiple places.
16:22:09 <gkellogg> https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/incorporating-feedback-in-your-pull-request
16:23:47 <pfps> q+
16:23:51 <TallTed> ora: why is there needs-discussion on https://github.com/w3c/rdf-schema/pull/9 ?
16:23:59 <ora> ack pfps
16:24:11 <TallTed> gkellogg: pfps took issue with something there
16:24:33 <TallTed> pfps: I would like PR and Issue names and descriptions correspond to their content
16:25:07 <TallTed> gkellogg: you need to clear your change request, because that blocks it from being merged
16:25:40 <gkellogg> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-schema/pull/9
16:26:31 <gkellogg> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/32
16:26:40 <TallTed> i|why is there needs-discussion|subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-schema/pull/9|
16:26:49 <TallTed> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/32
16:27:37 <TallTed> gkellogg: we have not settled on what to call triples that don't themselves include quoted triples, vs those that do
16:28:13 <TallTed> ... "simple" and "complex" were one suggestion, which I've started to apply
16:28:46 <TallTed> ... we need to decide on nomenclature to use going forward; this was one attempt to do that
16:29:03 <TallTed> q?
16:29:11 <afs> q+
16:29:20 <TallTed> ora: any other comments?
16:29:26 <ora> ack afs
16:29:56 <TallTed> afs: I'm not seeing the need for this extra terminology. a triple has 3 components, whether one of those may be a quoted triple or not.
16:30:27 <TallTed> ... making this another concept seems unnecessary and potentially confusing
16:31:09 <TallTed> gkellogg: we do still have the collective "triple" including both "simple" and "complex"
16:31:25 <TallTed> afs: I don't think we need this in top-level terminology
16:31:39 <TallTed> ora: so we could have this elsewhere, not at top-level?
16:31:47 <TallTed> afs: yes
16:33:46 <ora> q+
16:34:47 <TallTed> [back and forth between afs and gkellogg]
16:34:54 <ora> ack ora
16:35:38 <TallTed> ora: so we have triples (all encompassing), complex triples (containing quoted triples as subj or obj), and simple triples (no quoted triples in play)
16:35:42 <olaf> q+
16:35:46 <pfps> q+
16:35:54 <ora> ack olaf
16:36:16 <TallTed> ... could we have complex and non-complex triples, clarifying the disjoint relationship between these?
16:36:31 <enrico> q+
16:36:49 <ora> ack pfps
16:37:11 <TallTed> olaf: I can see both sides. I think the differentiating terminology will be useful, but I want nested and non-nested triples, instead of complex and simple
16:37:12 <gkellogg> q+
16:37:23 <afs> q+
16:37:28 <ora> ack enrico
16:37:43 <TallTed> pfps: I wonder why we're discussing this in context of a directed PR, rather than an overarching issue
16:38:39 <TallTed> enrico: I think triples remain triples, and when used as terms (subj or obj), they are "triple-terms"
16:39:14 <TallTed> ora: how would you refer to the triples which use triple-terms?
16:39:22 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:39:32 <TallTed> enrico: RDF 1.1 triple, or simple/complex triple, maybe
16:40:02 <TallTed> gkellogg: to answer pfps, the discussion has arisen on a PR because the PR made the issue visible
16:40:30 <TallTed> ... nested vs unnested might be reasonable alternative
16:40:52 <ora> "There are only two things that are hard in CS: naming, cache invalidation, and off-by-one errors."
16:41:13 <ora> q?
16:41:16 <enrico> q+
16:41:38 <TallTed> ... retrospectively, we know that triples that include blank nodes do not need to be differentiated from triples that do not include blank nodes, but we don't yet have hindsight about nested/quoted/embedded/etc. triples
16:41:44 <ora> ack afs
16:42:12 <TallTed> afs: what about changes in RDF 1.2 that are not about quoted triples? there's at least one such
16:42:48 <TallTed> ... there seems to be a lot more editing needed
16:43:22 <TallTed> ... I'm concerned about inventing terminology that will not be used except by confused people
16:44:13 <ora> ack enrico
16:44:28 <TallTed> ... there hasn't been much discussion on the PR because it's labeled as a Use Case
16:45:07 <ora> q+
16:45:15 <TallTed> enrico: we say that "ground triples" are triples without bnodes. maybe we say "flat triples" are those without embedded/quoted/nested
16:45:24 <ora> ack ora
16:46:05 <TallTed> ora: clearly, naming is extremely important. at some future point, we will need a careful review to make sure that terms are used consistently.
16:46:40 <TallTed> ... in history of RDF development, we used "pumpkin" as a stand-in for "nodes", which we hadn't figure out a name for yet
16:47:24 <TallTed> ... we have two things: 1) what to do for this PR, if anything; 2) the broader issue of making all specs consistent internally and across the board
16:47:28 <gkellogg> q+
16:47:34 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:48:16 <TallTed> gkellogg: I think the controversial terms serve the purpose for now. afs has some ideas about doc organization which would help clarify things as we go forward
16:48:51 <pfps> q+ to ask whether this PR will be merged in before FPWD
16:48:54 <TallTed> ... specific comments in the PR will help move it along. terminology may be considered placeholders for now, with refinement to happen later.
16:49:21 <TallTed> ora: I think we've got a reasonable path forward for now
16:49:30 <gkellogg> q+
16:49:38 <TallTed> ... time is short again, but perhaps we have time for one more item
16:49:55 <ora> ack pfps
16:49:55 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to ask whether this PR will be merged in before FPWD
16:50:04 <TallTed> afs: how do we add material from CG report to these documents?
16:50:22 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:50:32 <afs> s/how do we add/are we adding/
16:50:37 <TallTed> pfps: how does this relate to FPWD?
16:51:04 <afs> q+
16:51:04 <TallTed> gkellogg: waiting until things are perfect will mean we never publish FPWD
16:51:24 <TallTed> ... text direction, canonicalization, some other things want work
16:51:38 <TallTed> ora: what is https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/pull/13 ?
16:51:47 <TallTed> ktk: I created that
16:51:58 <gkellogg> q+ to discuss disposition of other bits of the RDF-star CG report
16:52:22 <TallTed> ... it's just an informative addition to the SPARQL protocol spec, showing another SELECT query
16:52:32 <ora> ack afs
16:52:46 <ora> ack gkellogg
16:52:46 <Zakim> gkellogg, you wanted to discuss disposition of other bits of the RDF-star CG report
16:52:57 <TallTed> afs: i18n issues are awaiting a consensus proposal, which I have floating around in my head, waiting to put forward
16:53:29 <TallTed> gkellogg: there are several elements of the CG report that need incorporation, some in rdf-new, some elsewhere
16:54:51 <TallTed> afs: question was about a principle decision, of whether we incorporate CG report into 1.2 specs now or later, after we resolve more basic updates than nested (or whatever)
16:55:37 <TallTed> gkellogg: much should/must wait until semantics TF has done its work
16:55:46 <TallTed> ora: we're at time
16:56:00 <TallTed> ... propose adjournment
16:56:05 <TallTed> [no objections]
16:56:14 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:56:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
16:56:46 <ktk> s/ktk/rubensworks/
16:59:21 <TallTed> i|what is|subtopic: w3c/sparql-protocol#13|
16:59:21 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/issues/13 -> Pull Request 13 Add informative quoted triples example, Closes #12 (rubensworks) needs discussion
16:59:34 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:59:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:00:23 <TallTed> i/i18n issues/topic: brief AOB/
17:00:56 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:00:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:01:48 <TallTed> s| https://github.com/w3c/sparql-protocol/issues/13 -> Pull Request 13 Add informative quoted triples example, Closes #12 (rubensworks) needs discussion||
17:01:48 <ghurlbot> https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/12 -> Action 12 [closed] add ora's and greg's regret and chair name in last calls minutes (on pchampin) due  2 Feb 2023
17:02:28 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:02:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:03:27 <TallTed> s/s| https/s|https/
17:03:40 <TallTed> s| https://github.com/w3c/rdf-star-wg/issues/12 -> Action 12 [closed] add ora's and greg's regret and chair name in last calls minutes (on pchampin) due  2 Feb 2023||
17:03:48 <TallTed> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:03:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/13-rdf-star-minutes.html TallTed
17:45:33 <pfps> pfps has left #rdf-star
17:58:45 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:16:15 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
18:34:19 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
19:53:46 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:02:29 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:38:39 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
20:55:39 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
21:00:49 <gkellog__> gkellog__ has joined #rdf-star
21:02:41 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
21:09:40 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
23:24:38 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:42:07 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-star
23:46:48 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-star
<pchampin> previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/04/06-rdf-star-minutes.html
<pchampin> next meeting: https://www.w3.org/2023/04/20-rdf-star-minutes.html
<pchampin> regrets+ gtw